a 


ees 
Some 


Ne 


~ 
oo 


v 


Ae 


eer 


= 


pe 
. a 


. 
. 
. 


3 


matt 


Cente ceided ache, 
Spa es 


ete 
aan eh 
SSraaa nt 
bs) 


‘e 


rie 


Seek 
ed 
ee ee 
Poe ore es 
ste een 


CEM Pees 


tga 


ee RP 








Division “PNZ 2" 
es mores 


a = Py 
ifs 3 
Z 

. 5 
| ~ 
' iy 4 
it ' ; 
: ve 
/ é 

ay iY 
L > { 

©) eM ot 

4 
7 
Ac: oe | > ‘A 

io) ? = 
a . ; ta 

- >| 

; ‘ 
7) F 
a , 1 , 4 “<< 
c=) ‘ P 
Ps 











THE LITERATURES OF GREECE 
AND ISRAEL IN THE 
RENAISSANCE 


Paes 
REN AG 


Oa 


. 


ve a Mii : ne 
ra 
P tee 





ARRAN OF PRINTED 


f* a 
ee | Pd ) ry 4 Q fete | on } 


y INV LU Lous j 


Wy | 


ne 


~~”! { PAY 


The Literatures of Greece 
and Israel in the 


Renaissance 


By 


Rev. Francis B. Denio, D. D. 


(Address delivered before Bangor Theological 
Seminary by Rev. Francis B. Denio, D. D., 
professor emeritus. ) 


1925 
THE STRATFORD COMPANY, Publishers 
Boston, MAssACHUSETTS 





Copyright 
FRANOIS B. DENIO 


Printed in the United States of America 





ee af | 


TEM 
Ay Wea ve a 
Aetuahl eh ON 
i ‘ve 4 





To THE Memory oF My WIFE 
WHO DURING FORTY-FIVE YEARS STRENGTHENED 
ME WITH LOVE AND WISE COUNSEL 


Fe Gey 


NEA AS HY) 


Nate 


ie Rath 





The Literatures of Greece and Israel 
in the Renaissance 


HE theme proposed for consideration con- 
cerns a section of that great chapter in 
European history known as the Renaissance. 
This chapter of history may be designated as the 
three centuries beginning with the year 1350. It 
may be described in a general way as due to the 
renewal of intellectual life in the western part of 
the old Roman empire. Much of this region was 
once a part of the home of the old Graeco-Roman 
civilization. ‘The barbarian invasions into Italy, 
France, Spain, and England had driven learning 
and letters into the monasteries and ecclesiastical 
foundations. The learning cherished in these 
places was chiefly that which was valued for 
monkish or the priestly life, while the larger frac- 
tion of the life of letters, both worthy and un- 
worthy, of ancient culture was neglected. 
After the barbarian migrations had ceased, and 
affairs in western Europe began to take on a more 
settled form, intellectual activity became a larger 


[1] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


factor in human life. About the close of the 
eighth century, a little before the year 800 A. D., 
Charlemagne initiated an intellectual foundation. 
The tradition of that work may have been main- 
tained during the anarchy of the tenth century. 
In the eleventh century indications appear of the 
coming of the university of Paris. By the year 
1200 there were three great centers of intellectual 
activity in Europe; in Paris for theology, in 
Bologna for law, and in Salerno for medicine. At 
that date neither Oxford nor Cambridge had be- 
come in any sense a rival of Paris, though they 
were beginning to be seats of learning. 

By the year 1350 the intellectual activity of 
Europe had brought into existence eleven univer- 
sities in Italy, seven in France, four in Spain, one 
in Portugal, two in England, and one on the con- 
tinent east of the Rhine, at Prague in Bohemia. 

Why speak of a revival of learning beginning 
about 1350 when there was already so great in- 
tellectual activity? It is for the reason that 
about this date new elements became active in 
the life of western Europe, which were called the 
New Learning, and which within the next three 
hundred years largely revolutionized the educa- 


[2] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


tional systems of western Europe. This introduc- 
tion of the new learning to western Europe is 
called the Revival of Learning. Another name 
which is often more appropriate is the Revival of 
Letters. ‘This will sometimes be used by prefer- 
ence. 

These three centuries called the Renaissance 
saw men bestirring themselves vigorously in many 
directions, in art, in the discovery of new worlds, 
in that discovery of the physical world the result 
of which is named science. These and many other 
developments in social and political life are a part 
of the Renaissance. But these activities are no 
part of our present theme. Rather we have to do 
with the discovery of an old world, and of a for- 
gotten civilization by mastering the literature of 
that old world. This is more exactly what is 
meant by the revival of learning, or the revival 
of letters. Or, in other words, it was “‘the quick- 
ening of human intelligence by renewed acquaint- 
ance with the literature, the philosophy, the civ- 
ilization of classical antiquity.” 

It was the recovery of the classical Latin, 
Greek and Hebrew literatures. Our theme is the 
recovery of the Greek and Hebrew literatures, 


[3] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


and the meaning of that recovery for the world. 
This recovery began in Italy and continued there 
until toward the year 1500 when the progress of 
letters crossed the Alps and speedily mastered 
and revolutionized the educational systems of 
France, Germany and England. This movement 
was the outcome of centuries of history, some fea- 
tures of which should be called to mind. 

In order to understand the beginning of the 
movement, its progress and the conditions of its 
success, it is necessary to recognize the place the 
Latin language had in the educational life of west- 
ern Europe, and the place the Latin classics had 
in the beginning of this movement. 

Latin was the language of the church in west- 
ern Europe, and it had been from the beginning. 
Therefore it was the language of the schools in 
monasteries and episcopal foundations, and con- 
- sequently it came to be the language of the uni- 
versities. In short it was the universal language 
of learning in western Europe. It was not a cul- 
tured Latin. Cicero would have regarded it as 
a degenerate and barbarous speech. 

There was little desire in the church to culti- 
vate a classical standard of speech. For centuries 


[4] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


ecclesiastics had looked with suspicion on any cul- 
tural study of classical Latin literature unless it 
was directly for ecclesiastical ends. Gregory the 
Great, pope 590-604, directly antagonized study 
of Latin grammar for securing correctness of 
speech and elegance of expression. Occasionally 
a monk or a priest found pleasure in classical 
Latin, but the general feeling was that such pleas- 
ure was a forbidden fruit. The revival of learn- 
ing began with an interest in Latin classics which 
was too mighty for ecclesiastics to control. 

During all the centuries of darkness and dis- 
order it had been possible both to find access to 
classical Latin literature and to read it. On the 
other hand the knowledge which western Europe 
had of Greek literature had long vanished. In- 
deed it was held to be the language of heretics 
and to contain writings full of error and therefore 
it was to be avoided. 

Once Latin literature, and, in Italy, Greek lit- 
erature had occupied a place of power. ‘They 
had lost it because of their paganism more than 
for other reasons. ‘These literatures contained 
ideals with which Christianity could never be in 
harmony. Indeed some of the more polished 


[5] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


poets, especially those of Rome, so glorified the 
flesh that a clean-minded person can feel only dis- 
gust with their writings. Poetry, at its best, was 
saturated with polytheism. ‘The representations 
of the deities in Homer were such that Plato 
would have his poems excluded from his ideal re- 
public. 

Moreover Christianity had been compelled to 
measure weapons with these literatures. In the 
struggle to establish the reasonableness of its 
faith the church had passed a test more severe 
than the persecutions of the empire. ‘The writ- 
ings of the early Christians which have come 
down to us show that their struggle was against ~ 
greater intellectual odds than their successors 
have ever known. 

Symonds says of this struggle: ‘“[he church of 
the early Christian centuries while battling with 
paganism recognized her deadliest foe in litera- 
ture. Not only were the Greek and Latin mas- 
terpieces the stronghold of a mythology that had 
to be erased from the popular mind; not only was 
their morality antagonistic to Christian ethics; in 
addition to these grounds for hatred and distrust, 
the classics idealised a form of human life which 


[6] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


the new faith regarded as worthless. What was 
culture in comparison with a human soul? Why 
should time be spent on the dreams of poets, when 
every minute might well be spent in pondering 
the gospels? What was the use of making this 
life refined and agreeable by study when it formed 
but an insignificant prelude to an eternity wherein 
mundane learning would be valueless?” (Revival 
om Leanning; p..59:) 

Here is the chief reason why the Latin classics 
were neglected and the Greek classics forgotten. 
Not absolutely forgotten, for scattered here and 
there through the dark centuries and the middle 
ages were scholars who had a sense that in Greek 


could be found a valuable helper to a more per- 
fect knowledge of the Bible; and once in a while 
such a scholar in some way attained a modest 
knowledge of the language. 

Hebrew was a language even more unknown 
than Greek. Its knowledge was confined to the 
Jews. Once in a while a Christian scholar had 
a feeling that Hebrew could be of use in biblical 
learning. Such a scholar was rare. 


[7] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


Such in brief was the condition in the Middle 
Ages of the knowledge of the Latin and Greek 
classics and of the Hebrew language. 

As has been said the revival of letters came 
with the recovery of the Latin and Greek classics. 
It began in Italy, and it began with the Latin lit- 
erature which was at hand and which could be 
read by every one who was at all lettered. ‘This 
was wholly normal. For any revival of letters 
as a whole the Latin classics were a natural be- 
ginning, an easy stepping stone. For Italy, how- 
ever, it was more than a stepping stone, and 
there it was regarded more highly than among 
the other peoples who shared in the great move- 
ment. 

As this fact limited somewhat the influence of 
the Greek classics in the revival of letters in 
Italy, the reasons for it deserve notice. Classical 
Latin had Rome for its home, and the Italian 
people through the Middle Ages regarded them- 
selves as heirs to all the greatness that Rome 
once had. They looked on themselves as more 
than the custodians of Rome’s literature. It was 
their mission to be its continuators. Although 
the one great poet of the Middle Ages, their 


[8] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


Dante, had written his masterpiece in the lan- 
guage spoken by the Italian people, the genera- 
tions immediately following despised it because 
it was not in Latin. They were obsessed with the 
idea that they might recover the past greatness 
of Rome if they should revive the ancient lan- 
guage, renew its literary life, its institutions and 
social life. ‘“The beginners in the humanistic 
movement were conscious that what separated 
them more than anything else from their Roman 
ancestors was want of elegance of diction.” 
(Symonds id., p. 525.) 

The person who most fully represented this 
devotion to the Latin classics and who gave di- 
rection to its subsequent development was 
Petrarch, sometimes called the first modern man, 
and better, the first of the humanists, a term soon 
to be noticed. The life of Petrarch began in 1304 
and continued until 1374. The date given above 
for the beginning of the Renaissance falls within 
his life, and at a point when he was at the height 
of his influence. In 1341 when he was 37 years 
old he was crowned poet laureate and was ac- 
knowledged to have earned his laurel crown 
“chiefly by his skill in Latin writing and by his 


; [9] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


zeal for the literature of the ancient Romans.” 

The awakening sense of the value of literature 
was accompanied by a reaction against the limita- 
tions of the intellectual life as found in the uni- 
versities then in existence, and in ecclesiastical 
foundations. ‘That life was dominated by scho- 
lasticism, a tone of mind both unliterary and anti- 
literary. Scholasticism addressed itself to that 
side of the intellect which is manifested in the 
processes of deductive logic. When it dealt with 
Scripture it deduced the meaning of Scripture 
according to the requirements of its “fourfold” 
meaning, the historical, figurative, allegorical and 
mystical senses. When outside the control of the 
specific first principles of deductive logic there 
were no safeguards against the wildest fancies. 
The genuine historical spirit was unknown. 

The realm of literature includes regions that 
are unknown to scholasticism. Literature con- 
cerns the world and whatever is of interest to 
men. Its readers learn to see life through the 
eyes of other persons. Thus they can absorb a 
vivid sense of truth, and even of reality, and so 
learn more of the realities of life in their breadth. 
Literature furnishes diversion from the wear and 


[10] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


fret of life; it quickens insight into human char- 
acter and into the meaning of life; it helps to gain 
increased sympathy for men in their toil and suf- 
fering, and in their aspirations for noble living; 
it is stimulus for thought, and yet more for im- 
agination; it kindles worthy emotions and offers 
inspiration for worthy conduct; it offers visions 
of noble ideals; it may impart courage for the 
hard and depressing experiences in life; and it 
can help men in their questionings concerning the 
problems of life and destiny. 

Whether or not Greek literature did all these 
things it had more to offer than was found in the 
classic Latin literature. 

Literature has its power because it is composed 
of writings which concern experiences universal 
to men, which touch their permanent interests, 
which are characterized by insight into their vital 
interests, which are sincere and truthful expres- 
sions of reality and which come close to the hearts 
of men and lay hold of them by reason of the per- 
vasive energy of the imagination. Scholasticism 
provides no such food for the souls of men. 

Beside writings such as these the productions 
of scholasticism were not literature. The souls 


[11] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


of men,crave mightily for ministry such as litera- 
ture offers. The generation of Petrarch found 
something of this craving met in Latin literature, 
and in the nascent Italian literature. They pro- 
claimed the classic Latin literature as the literae 
humaniores, letters more humane than scholastic- 
ism produces, hence they were called Humanists. 
The classics have not ceased to be called the 
Humanities. 

Petrarch and his companions believed firmly 
that the classic Latin writings were the finest 
ever produced, and many continued in this obses- 
sion for more than a century after the death of 
Petrarch; as for example a leading Roman hu- 
manist then refused to learn Greek lest injury 
should come to his Latin style of which he was 
vain. Another advised against the reading of the 
Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible, lest this 
too should injure one’s Latin style. 

Nevertheless Petrarch and others came to be- 
lieve that the Greek literature contained some- 
thing which would be of value to them. In fact 
their study of the Latin authors pointed them in 
that direction, especially Horace and Cicero. The 


[12] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


former enjoined the sons of Piso if they would 
write poetry: 


vos exemplaria Graeca 
nocturna versate manu, versate diurna. 


‘Make Greece your model when you write 
And turn her volumes over day and night.” 
—(Conington’s trans.) 
Similar sentiments are found many times in 
Latin authors. Yet this precept could not be car- 
ried into practice until one had learned Greek. 
Those first humanists neither knew Greek nor 
had they opportunity to learn it. For a few de- 
cades they sought vainly for some one to open the 
door of knowledge to them. The world with the 
knowledge of Greek letters lay east of the Adria- 
tic Sea. Its chief center was Constantinople, the 
capital of the Eastern Empire. For centuries 
Greek and Roman Christians had held each other 
as excommunicated heretics. The Greek language 
was believed to be full of heretical writings. The 
very letters of the Greek alphabet were regarded 
with suspicion. 
It is not at all certain that in Petrarch’s time a 
single person lived in Italy who had the knowl- 


[13] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


edge and capacity to teach the text of a classical 
Greek author. 

After various ineffectual attempts to secure in- 
struction in Greek letters for Italy, Manuel 
Chrysoloras of Constantinople was induced in 
1396 to come to Florence and teach in the uni- 
versity of that city. His work was the beginning 
of the modern teaching of Greek in western 
Europe. 

The university of Florence — what does the 
word university now suggest to you? For one 
thing it suggests a library with thousands of 
printed volumes, and sometimes scores or even 
hundreds of manuscripts. It also suggests text 
books possessed by students for study. here was 
nothing of the sort for the study of Greek in the 
Florence of 1396. In fact, we have no reason to 
suppose that a single copy of any Greek classic 
was owned in Florence. 

A school for the study of languages—what 
does that now presuppose? textbooks of elemen- 
tary lessons, grammars and dictionaries as well as 
the texts of the classics to read. So far as our 
knowledge goes we must believe that not one of 
these things existed for the classroom of Manuel 


[14] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


Chrysoloras when he began his four years of 
teaching in Florence from 1396 to 1400. How 
the work was carried on we must judge from a 
description of the work of a professor of rhetoric, 
as the teacher of Latin classics was styled. 

“Tn picturing to ourselves the method pursued 
by the humanists in the instruction of their 
classes, we must divest our minds of all associa- 
tions with the practice of modern professors. 
Very few of the students whom the master saw ~ 
before him, possessed more than meager portions 
of the texts of Virgil or of Cicero; they had no 
notes, grammars, lexicons or dictionaries of an- 
tiquities, or of mythology to help them. It was 
therefore necessary for the lecturer to dictate 
quotations, to repeat parallel passages at full 
length, to explain historical allusions, to analyze 
the structure of sentences in detail, to provide 
copious illustrations of grammatical usage, to 
trace the stages by which a word acquired its 
meaning in a special context, to command a full 
vocabulary of synonyms, to give rules for ortho- 
graphy and to have the whole Pantheon at his 
fingers’ ends. In addition to this he was expected 
to comment upon the meaning of his author, to 


[15] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


interpret his philosophy, to point out the beauties 
of his style, to introduce appropriate moral dis- 
quisition on his doctrine, to sketch his biography, 
and to give some account of his relation to the 
history of his country and to his predecessors in 
the field of letters. In short the professor of 
rhetoric had to be a grammarian, a philologer, 
and historian, a stylist and a sage in one. He was 
obliged to pretend at least to an encyclopedic 
knowledge of the classics and to retain whole vol- 
umes in his memory. All these requirements, 
which seem to have been satisfied by such men as 
Filelfo and Poliziano, made the profession of elo- 
quence — for so the subject matter of humanism 
was often called — a very different business from 
that which occupies a lecturer in the present cen- 
tury. Scores of students, old and young, with 
nothing but pen and paper on desks before them, 
sat patiently recording what the lecturer said. At 
the end of his discourses on the Georgics or the 
Verrines, each of them carried away a compendi- 
ous volume, containing a transcript of the au- 
thor’s text, together with a miscellaneous mass of 
notes, critical, explanatory, ethical, aesthetical, 
historical and biographical. In other words a 


[16] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


book had been dictated, and as many scores of 
copies as there were attentive pupils had been 
made. The language was Latin. No dialect of 
Italian would have been intelligible to the stu- 
dents of different nationalities who crowded the 
lecture room.” (Symonds, Revival of Learning, 
pp. 124ff.) 

Chrysoloras prepared a grammar in Greek for 
his scholars. It was entitled Erotemata, i. e. 
Questions, or a Catechism, and this was used for 
more than a generation, either in Greek or in a 
translation, by the learners of the language. The 
Erotemata of Chrysoloras did not include a syn- 
tax. This first came in the grammar of Theodore 
Gaza in 1445. ‘These grammars had to be dic- 
tated, as in fact all the instruction must be, text, 
translation and explanation, thus giving the ele- 
ments of grammar and dictionary all together 
with the text. Let us remind ourselves that dur- 
ing the first generation of this work, the art of 
printing was yet to be, and it was a full generation 
after its invention before it came to the aid of 
the universities. 

The lecture room of Chrysoloras was crowded 
with students. Vergerio, a professor in the uni- 


[17] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


versity of Padua, aged 26 years, resigned his chair 
in order to go to Florence and attend these lec- 
tures. After four years in Florence, Chrysoloras 
taught in other Italian cities. 

This was the beginning of a century of study 
of the Greek classics in Italy. Pupils of Chry- 
soloras became teachers in turn, imparting the in- 
struction that they had received. The treatment 
accorded to Chrysoloras attracted other Greeks 
to Italy that they might share the profit and fame 
that came to him. Another class of teachers con- 
sisted of Italian scholars who went to Constan- 
tinople and there qualified themselves to teach. 
Noteworthy among these was Guarino of Verona 
who became professor in the university of Fer- 
rara and made it so famous that many students 
were attracted to it from countries beyond the 
Alps. 

Still another class of teachers began to appear 
before 1450 of scholars who had never left Italy, 
but who had gained their knowledge under the 
guidance of the teachers previously mentioned. 
Among these was Vittorino da Feltre who taught 
in Mantua from 1423 to 1446 in the palace of 
the Marquis Gonzaga. He is one of the most 


[18] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


attractive persons of the whole revival of learn- 
ing. One is tempted to describe him and his work 
in much detail. It must suffice to say that he 
taught for the development of the whole person- 
ality of his pupils, body, mind and spirit in a man- 
ner that would have pleased Plato as Plato’s mind 
is revealed in his Republic. As Petrarch is called 
the first humanist, so Vittorino has been called 
the first modern schoolmaster. 

The primary need of a pupil is a competent 
teacher. How this need was supplied for the 
teaching of Greek has been shown. His next 
need is books, texts of the authors, grammars and 
dictionaries. As already indicated the materials 
for such books were given by the teachers in their 
lectures. The books first needed were the texts 
of the classics. Gradually this need was supplied, 
and libraries were gathered. 

At an early stage of the revival of Greek let- 
ters the text might exist for the pupil only in the 
memory of the teacher who himself was not al- 
ways fortunate enough to own a text. Otherwise 
it existed only in a manuscript, and the manu- 
scripts of some authors were rare. ‘This scarcity 
was remedied in part by the purchase of manu- 


[19] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 
/ 


scripts from the East. Agents of Italian patrons 
of learning ransacked the sources of documents 
for those of which they had heard. Scholars 
sought the privilege of copying manuscripts for 
their own needs. Copying manuscripts became a 
profession. When the Turks captured Constan- 
tinople in 1453 Greek scholars took refuge in 
Italy bringing precious manuscripts with them. 
Thus it became possible to gather libraries com- 
posed of manuscripts. Five notable libraries of 
this sort were gathered in Italy during this cen- 
tury. Frederick, Duke of Urbino, who died in 
1482, six years before any Greek text was printed, 
gathered a library of 772 manuscripts, of which 
604 were Latin, 93 Greek, 73 Hebrew and 2 
Italian. 

It is well to emphasize the fact that these 
libraries were manuscript books. They were 
gathered very largely before printing began to 
aid Greek letters. Even after this beginning for 
quite a period the wealthy buyers of books de- 
spised a printed volume in comparison with the 
manuscript ones. The first Greek author printed 
and published of which the date is certain was 
Homer, published in 1488, 92 years after Chryso- 


[20] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


loras began his work in Florence. Within the 
next thirty years all the greatest and most vol- 
uminous Greek authors had been published. First 
editions of lesser Greek authors continued to be 
published during the following hundred years. 
Even now the public occasionally has the sensa- 
tion of the first publication of such a writing. 

The first Greek textbook published was a 
grammar in 1476. ‘Thus it is evident that stu- 
dents had to copy all grammatical teaching for 
80 years, and their texts for at least 92 years. 

The earliest printed Greek dictionary of which 
I have learned was printed in 1497, so that for 
a hundred years Italian pupils had been writing 
the materials of a dictionary as dictated by their 
teachers. It is reported, however, that this dic- 
tionary had existed as a manuscript for 20 years 
and had been available for copying for 17 years. 

It was under conditions such as these that the 
revival of learning ran its course of a hundred 
years in Italy beginning at Florence in 1396. It 
gradually spread and increased until before the 
end of the third quarter of the century it was ab- 
sorbing a large part of the intellectual life of 
Italy. 


[21] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


The pupils were led into the exploration of a 
world hitherto unknown. To this they were im- 
pelled, in part, by curiosity, as well as by mental 
hunger, and also by the desire to gratify the love 
for beauty. ‘The literature revealed a past that 
had something of life richer than anything in the 
life they knew. It was a life of individuality and 
of freedom of thought, of clearness of vision 
when anything was actually seen, and of full re- 
spect for human reason. 

The literary life of Italy was turned from pro- 
ductive activity to the task of interpreting Greek 
life from its literature, and also to the business 
of translating the Greek classics into Latin, be- 
cause a demand for such translations came from 
the collectors of books. ‘These, when wealthy, 
each demanded a new translation made especially 
for his own collection. Among the translations, 
that of Plato made by Ficino is still reputed the 
best ever made in Italy. 

During this century the bulk of the pioneer 
work for the study of the Greek language was 
done. ‘The materials for grammar and lexicon 
were quarried out of the texts. The beginnings 
of textual criticism were well made. As manu- 


[22] 


~ 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


scripts began to come from the east they were 
found to be divergent in some degree. Which 
was right? Why was it right? How had the 
error. come to be made? Again, was a phrase 
obviously wrong? If so, what was the correct 
phrase? Questions such as these occasioned the 
foundation of the science of obtaining the cor- 
rect text of an ancient author who cannot in per- 
son tell what he meant to say. 

Again a notable beginning was made in histori- 
cal criticism when Laurentius Valla “exposed as a 
forgery the mediaeval document” known as the 
Donation of Constantine “that testified to the 
transference by Constantine of the sovereignty 
of Italy and the west to Pope Sylvester.” 

Beginnings such as these were of the highest 
importance as will appear later. Scholars of 
other countries were able to appropriate the 
methods and adapt them to higher needs. 

There was a darker side to the picture. In 


the latter half of the century the Italian human- 


ists became vain of their attainments, jealous of 
one another, and as a class developed habits of 
self-display and arrogance. They also prized the 
mode of expression more than the thing to be 


[23] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


expressed. ‘The use of polite letters, of the hu- 
manities in Latin and Greek, failed to awaken 
the Italian humanists of the latter quarter of the 
century, as a whole, to other and better things 
than erudition and a polished manner. 

Among them were those whose devotion to 
Latin letters lauded in word and by deed the 
paganism of ancient Rome, even in its grossest 
forms, and even attempted to revive these fea- 
tures of its life. 

Bright features against this background were 
the Platonic Academy at Florence, and the culti- 
vation of letters in some schools, notably Ferrara. 

As the century drew to a close the study of 
classical literature spent its force as a creative 
power in Italy, but began to manifest such power 
in France, Germany and England. From these 
lands young men had been coming to Italy to gain 
the new learning, and carrying back the fame of 
it to their own countries. Often they aroused in- 
terest, and now and then they engaged in teach- 
ing it. 

In France a pronounced attempt was made as 
early as 1458 to establish the teaching of Greek 
in the university of Paris. The lecturer stayed 


[24] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


one year. Afterward Greek instruction was in- 
termittent for fully half a century. Still the cir- 
cumstances were much better than they were in 
Italy a century earlier. 

In France Latin literature had no advantage 
over Greek on account of race pride or historical 
associations as was the case in Italy. It was 
indeed the universal language for scholars. As 
such it might perhaps replace one’s native tongue, 
as with Erasmus, who is said to have lost the lan- 
guage of Holland to which he was born, and who 
cared not to communicate with any person save 
in Latin, unless perhaps in Greek. Although he 
valued Latin as a vehicle of communication, he 
testified emphatically that “without Greek the 
amplest erudition in Latin is imperfect.” 

Not only was the attitude of scholars toward 
Latin different from the attitude in Italy, but 
quite new conditions for study had been produced 
by the art of printing. Although instruction in 
Greek might be intermittent in Paris, the paucity 
of teachers was not so serious a lack as it once 
had been. The year 1500 saw the texts of most 
of the Latin authors in print. The greater Greek 
authors came soon after, so that a pupil need no 


[25] 





The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


longer depend on a teacher for the text of an au- 
thor. Grammars had begun to multiply. Dic- 
tionaries were soon to become numerous. ‘The 
private study and reflection of a student could 
count for much more than previously. ‘The great- 
est classical scholar of France in the first part of 
this new century was Budaeus whose “untiring in- 
dustry and indomitable perseverance,” with even 
a small amount of instruction brought him attain- 
ments which surpassed those of any preceding 
scholar and secured for him the primacy of Eu- 
rope in erudition. 

Other aspiring students who lacked his industry 
and perseverance were obliged to go from France 
to Italy until after the accession of Francis I to 
the throne in 1515. Budaeus induced the king to 
establish the royal college in 1530 where Latin, 
Greek and Hebrew were taught, and thus was 
secured permanent and adequate instruction in 
these languages. His example and influence may 
have contributed much to make erudition the mark 
of Greek scholarship in France. Certainly by the 
time of his death in 1540 the feeling had become 
strong in France that he who knew not Greek 
knew nothing. In that year was born J. J. Scal- 


[26 ] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


iger whose diligence was similar to that of 
Budaeus, and whose erudition so surpassed that 
of any predecessor that his name is still a symbol 
of the highest erudition attainable. 

It was in the early days of this development 
that John Calvin began his studies and that in the 
spirit of a humanist, pure and simple. He began 
Greek at Bourges in 1530, and continued the next 
year in Greek and Hebrew in Paris. 

In France scholars busied themselves in trans- 
lating Greek authors into French, rather than 
into Latin as had been done in Italy. The effect 
of the work in translation is thus described by 
Pattison: 

“The attempt to translate — and translation 
was one of the chief occupations of the educated 
— the juxtaposition of Greek and Hebrew forced 
upon them a sense of the comparative poverty of 
the modern idiom more keenly than any other of 
its deficiencies. The progress of the language 
was the ambition of every writer; and progress 
was identified with a material increase of the vo- 
cabulary.” (Essays 1. p. 118.) 

Hence the translators enriched their French by 
appropriating the words from Greek. After a 


[27] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


little the very taste developed by the study 
of Greek revolted at this method of enriching the 
French language. Apparently the result was dis- 
astrous to the study of Greek for the very knowl- 
edge of it came to be thought pedantic and was 
left for professional scholars whose duties re- 
quired them to know it. 

During the fifteenth century while lovers of the 
new learning were being attracted to Italy, Hol- 
land had become a source of intellectual life and 
stimulus. The pursuit of learning here had an 
origin quite different from that elsewhere. The 
center of this movement was the system of schools 
initiated in the Netherlands by the Brethren of 
the Common Life. This movement began in the 
eastern part of Holland at about the time of the 
work of Chrysoloras in Florence. Its prime pur- 
pose was religious. To this end the Brethren of 
the Common Life engaged in the production of 
good books (manuscripts at the outset), and in 
the education of the young for the purpose of 
‘raising up spiritual pillars in the temple of the 
Lord.” 

The Brotherhood founded not a few schools in 
the Netherlands, and in the adjacent parts of 


[28] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


Germany by the year 1400 or soon after. Among 
their earliest leaders was one who proved to be 
a distinguished educationalist. arly in the de- 
velopment of these schools the leaders insisted 
upon the study of the Bible in the Latin “Vul- 
gate’’ in their classes; ‘‘they placed German trans- 
lations of Christian authors into the hands of 
their pupils; they took pains to give them a good 
knowledge of Latin.” It is to be noticed that 
these leaders were not humanists, but men of 
piety, zealous for the promotion of Christian 
character. ‘The chief vehicle of their teaching 
was not Latin, but the mother tongue. 

Their school at Herzogenbusch (Bois le Duc) 
put Greek into its course at the very start in 1424. 
Please notice the fact that this was the year after 
Vittorino da Feltre began his work in Mantua. 
The school founded in 1496 in Liege came to have 
as many as 1,600 scholars. The original school 
at Deventer achieved the highest fame of all un- 
der Alexander Hegius (1474-1498) and had 
under him fully 2,000 pupils. It contributed much 
directly to the revival of learning in Germany, 
and less directly to France and England. ‘The 


[29 | 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


moral tone of its influence was higher than that 
of Italy taken as a whole. 

The parallel to Vittorino in time was equally a 
parallel in moral aim. ‘The chief difference was 
in the prominence given by the Brotherhood to 
the Latin Vulgate, and to the use of the mother 
tongue as the chief vehicle of education. It is 
said that ‘“‘seldom, if ever before, had so much 
attention been paid to the intellectual and moral 
training of youth.”” ‘The ideal when matured on 
the cultural side gradually approached that of 
Vittorino, and at its most complete stage work 
was done “not distinguishable from that of a 
Faculty of Arts in a contemporary university.” 

The glory of these schools is that from them 
went intellectual. and religious leaders who at 
home and in other lands were a healthy and note- 
worthy stimulus to the cause of sound learning, 
good morals and religion. It was a corrective 
of the influence of many of the later Italian hu- 
manists. Losing itself in the current of the re- 
vival of learning it helped to redeem it. 

The earliest great name to the credit of these 
schools is that of Thomas 4 Kempis, the author 
of the Imitation of Christ. He was trained in the 


[30] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


school at Deventer. At the close of his school 
days, being of a quiet and contemplative disposi- 
tion he asked and obtained a place in the con- 
vent of St. Agnes near the town of Zwolle, about 
25 miles northerly from Deventer and where the 
Brethren had a school. 

Thomas was born in 1380, studied in Deventer 
in its earliest days, and during his long life until 
1471 had much contact with the pupils of the 
Zwolle school, and he is credited with having been 
an important inspiration to many of them. Note- 
worthy among these were John Wessel, Rudolph 
Agricola and Alexander Hegius. ‘The two first 
rendered important service in the revival of let- 
ters, especially in Germany, and the third has al- 
ready been mentioned as the master of the Deven- 
ter school at its best. Hegius in turn had under 
him at one time Erasmus who became one of the 
foremost humanists of Europe, rendering import- 
ant service to Greek letters. By the time of 
Hegius Greek had become an important factor 
in these schools. It is not unlikely that Greek was 
taught by teachers who had studied in Italy, but 
the impulse for sound learning seems to have 
come entirely from native sources. 


[31] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


The establishment of a Collegium Trilingue at 
Louvain in 1517 for Latin, Greek and Hebrew 
was a further step of progress in the Netherlands, 
but is not to be attributed directly to the Brother- 
hood. 

In Germany the revival of learning began in 
various centers before the year 1500. 

John Reuchlin was among the earlier influential 
leaders. He studied Greek at Paris in 1473 under 
John Wessel (named above) and later in the 
university of Basle. Chief among all the early 
promoters of Greek in Germany was Rudolph 
Agricola, also mentioned in connection with 
Thomas a Kempis. He died while still in his 
prime, in 1485, yet, when the German humanists 
of the sixteenth century looked “back upon the 
origins of the new learning in their own land, they, 
with one accord, claimed as their forerunner Ru- 
dolph Agricola.”’ The ground for this claim is 
not wholly evident from the records extant. The 
unanimity of the testimony from those most com- 
petent to testify has caused general acceptance of 
the statement. His spirit received its character in 
Holland, his scholarship was matured in Italy. 


[32] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


Another great leader was Philip Melanchthon, 
born in 1497, educated in Pforzheim, the native 
place of Reuchlin, who was brother to Melanch- 
thon’s grandmother; also at the universities of 
Heidelberg and Tubingen. He attained in 1518, 
before he was twenty-two years old, the reputa- 
tion of being the foremost humanist in Germany. 
Two years earlier Erasmus had written of him: 
“Eternal God, what expectations does not Philip 
Melanchthon raise, who, though a youth, yea, 
rather, scarcely more than a boy, deserves equal 
esteem for his knowledge of both languages! 
What sagacity in argument, what purity of style, 
what comprehension of learned subjects, what 
varied reading, what delicacy and almost royal 
elegance of mind!” 

Henceforth an Italian university was no neces- 
sity for an ambitious German student. In the 
year 1518 Melanchthon was commended by 
Reuchlin as the fittest man for the Greek chair in 
the university recently founded by Frederick the 
Wise, elector of Saxony at his capital city, Witten- 
berg. Thither went Melanchthon, the humanist. 
There he convinced Germany that Greek, though 
unsurpassed as a literature for culture, and a field 


[33] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


for rich erudition, could render its choicest service 
as the servant of religious education. 

Melanchthon taught Greek to Martin Luther. 
He resisted the attempt to transfer him from the 
chair of Greek to that of theology. He did not 
belittle theology, for he held it to be the “queen 
of the sciences.”’ He did theology the greatest 
possible service by insisting on giving the best pos- 
sible preparation for the study of the Scriptures 
in their original tongues. He held theology to an 
exegetical foundation. Yet, while he made Greek 
his first thought, he actually taught subjects out- 
side Greek: Hebrew at times, Latin, Rhetoric, 
Logic, Mathematics and Physics. 

All this was the work of Melanchthon the 
humanist. In truth he seemed to have a genius 
for education. So his generation thought, and 
sought his counsel, and offered him the oppor- 
tunity to give shape to their educational ideals and 
methods. Accordingly he gave education in Ger- 
many a character which endured through several 
generations. Humanism gave no finer contribu- 
tion to the world than it gave through Melanch- 
thon. Nothing in the history of Germany is more 
precious than what she achieved under the guid- 


[34] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


ance of Melanchthon. Would that the power of 
his spirit might be revived! 

Humanism in England had much the kind of be- 
ginning that it had in other countries outside of 
Italy. Interested young men went to Italy, largely 
to Ferrara, attracted thither by the fame of the 
two Guarinos, father and son, and of Theodore 
Gaza, a Greek, and the most competent teacher 
of his time, also the author of a grammar which 
Erasmus used at Cambridge as the best available. 

Some of the Englishmen taught Greek on their 
return, or promoted its study in other ways. 
Among these was John Colet who had studied in 
Italy in 1493-1496. Like others he was shocked 
by the morals of many Italian humanists, and re- 
coiled from their example. On his return he be- 
gan in 1497 to lecture in Oxford on St. Paul’s 
Epistles. ‘This he continued to do in London after 
he had been appointed dean of St. Paul’s Cathe- 
dral in 1505. 

Of importance for Greek scholarship in Eng- 
land and also for biblical learning was the arrival 
in 1498 of Erasmus in Oxford. His entrance into 
the circle of scholars associated with Colet was 
of great benefit to them and to him. He was soon 


[35] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


to become the first man of letters in Europe, and 
he was gaining a name and influence that was inter- 
national. For this reason a few more words 
should be given to him. Born in Rotterdam in 
1466 he was a Hollander. In his youth he had 
made a beginning in Greek at Deventer while 
Hegius was there. Rudolph Agricola paid a short 
visit to Deventer while Erasmus was there and 
won an admiration from the boy which years 
later Erasmus expressed in no moderate terms. 
After experience in various educational cen- 
ters, including Paris, Erasmus went to Oxford in 
his thirty-second year. ‘There he cultivated Greek 
more fully. He was fond of his English associates 
and sympathized with their temper and the 
tone of their scholarship. Going later to Italy 
he there matured his Greek scholarship, and ed- 
ited books published by the Aldine press in Venice. 
He returned to England and taught Greek in 
Cambridge university in 1511-1514. There he 
engaged in his preparation of the Greek Testa- 
ment, with a Latin translation which he was 
shortly to publish. His desire was ‘“‘that the 
weakest woman should be able to read the gospels 
and the Epistles of St. Paul; that the husbandman 


[36] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


should sing portions of them to himself as he 
followed the plough; that the weaver should hum 
them to the tune of his shuttle; and that the 
traveler should beguile the tedium of the road by 
repeating their stories.’’ Among the learned and 
pious men who associated with Erasmus at Cam- 
bridge was William Tyndale who came to share 
this pious longing of Erasmus and to give the 
New Testament in English to his own nation. 
Erasmus returned to the continent, and from 
Basle gave the world in 1516 the first Greek Tes- 
tament it saw published. Later he was helpful in 
securing the establishment of the College at Lou- 
vain for the teaching of Latin, Greek and Hebrew 
which has already been mentioned. A friend of 
his had given a generous endowment for the 
Hebrew chair and died soon after. But for Eras- 
mus the project might have failed. He had great 
influence and was listened to on all sides with 
more than ordinary respect. ‘It was known that 
Erasmus would present of the events of the day 
the true humanistic view—the view of reason un- 
dimmed by sectarian passion.” (Pattison i. 129.) 
The influence of Erasmus in England was of 
importance both for the promotion of Greek 


[37] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


learning and the support of men such as Colet. 
The relation between the study of Greek and that 
of the Scriptures established at that time was 
never lost. English humanism had a religious 
tone from the beginning. 

Greek scholarship in England was also busied 
in the translation of Greek authors into English. 
Thus the non-scholarly part of the reading public 
was introduced to the life and thought of ancient 
Greece and Rome. ‘The resultant material con- 
tributed to the literary development of the Eliza- 
bethan age. English humanism had no finer repre- 
sentative than John Milton whose literary powers 
were as versatile as those of any Italian humanist, 
and whose Latinity was adequate to inflict a crush- 
ing blow on the man famed as the first scholar in 
Europe.  . | 

The story of Hebrew is not nearly solong. At 
this point attention should be called to a fact of 
importance. It is the distinction between the 
literature of Greece and its life and civilization 
on the one hand, and the literature of Israel with 
its life on the other hand. The literature of 
Greece was a pagan literature, the product of 


pagan life. ‘The life from which the Greek Testa- 
[38] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


ment was produced was far different and it is no 
part of a pagan literature. It came from the 
later development of the life which produced the 
Hebrew Bible. That the Greek Testament is no 
part of the development of Greek literature 1s 
largely recognized in the histories of that litera- 
ture. 

In harmony with all this is the fact that during 
the first century of the revival of learning in Italy 
slight attention was given to the Greek Testa- 
ment. Greek texts were issued in Italy for at 
least thirty years before the publication of a 
Greek Testament, and then it was not until after 
it had been published both in Spain and in Switzer- 
land. Indeed, the first Greek Testament pub- 
lished in Italy was a reprint from one in Switzer- 
land. 

Hellenic culture in the first Christian centuries 
had held the Greek Testament in contempt, re- 
garding it as deficient in literary excellence. Per- 
haps the Italian neglect of it was due to this cause, 
even as various Italian humanists despised the 
Latin Vulgate for the same reason. The neglect 
of the Greek Testament is readily understood 
when it is recognized as outside the literature of 


[39] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


Greece. That the vocabulary of the New Testa- 
ment is Greek is due to historical conditions, but 
its spirit is not Greek. It belongs to the religious 
development which produced the Hebrew Old 
Testament. An important confirmation of the 
position just stated is the fact that part (how 
large a part is not settled) of the New Testament 
was first produced in the Aramaic language. One 
of the problems of New Testament scholarship 1s, 
How much of the New Testament was first ex- 
pressed in Aramaic, a sister of the Hebrew lan- 
ouage? 

In the light of these facts in the discussion of 
the two literatures the Greek New Testament is 
to be treated as the Hebrew Old Testament is 
treated, as part of the classic literature of Israel. 
It is to be remembered that during the centuries 
before the revival of learning, while neither 
Greek nor Hebrew was known, the literature of 
Israel had been accessible in the translation known 
as the Latin Vulgate. All through the Middle 
Ages this was a body of literature common to 
western Europe although imperfectly known. It 
was really a revival of learning to make the knowl- 
edge of it general as was done in Deventer, and 


[40] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


the rest of the schools of the Brotherhood of the 
Common Life. 

While Greek had once been a part of the cul- 
tural knowledge of Italy, Hebrew had been un- 
known except by Jews and some of the earlier 
Christians. Origen and Jerome had few succes- 
sors. One of the more notable ones was Nicolaus 
de Lyra, a Christian teacher in the University of 
Paris who died in 1349 after he had written two 
commentaries on the Bible based on a diligent 
study of the original languages. 

Before the year 1500 the non-scholarly part of 
Germany, Bohemia and England had begun to be- 
come acquainted with the literature of Israel in 
their own tongues as translated from the Latin 
Vulgate. Such a Bible was printed in Bohemia 
in 1487. One had already been printed in Ger- 
many in 1466, and from that date until 1521 
thirteen more editions had been printed in Ger- 
many. In England it had not been printed, but 
for more than a hundred years wandering priests 
and others had made the Wycliffite version of the 
Vulgate familiar to those who would listen to it. 

As has been seen, when Greek learning crossed 
the Alps it was taken up with a spirit akin to that 


[41] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


of Vittorino, but more fully taught by experience 
and more fully aware of the needs of the time. 

Experience had taught more fully the strength 
and the weakness of Greek letters. ‘Uheir strength 
was the strength of ripely developed mental 
powers which God had created. Their weakness 
was that due to the blindness of a people that 
knew not the living God, the God who not only 
ereated the heavens and the earth, but who also 
created men in order that they might come into 
such a fellowship with himself as belonged only 
between persons with a holy character. Greek let- 
ters needed dedication to him who gave the capa- 
city to produce such marvellous literature. 

The spirit of the Brethren of the Common Life 
—the Hebraic spirit in short—was the spirit in 
which the new learning was met by a multitude, 
and they dedicated Greek letters more to the ser- 
vice of God than to culture as such. Aside from 
Manetti I have learned of no use of the Greek | 
Testament earlier than that recorded of John 
Colet when he began lecturing on the Epistles of 
Paul, in 1497 in Oxford. Soon the study of the 
Greek Testament and of the Hebrew Old Testa- 


[42] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


ment began to be closely associated and they had 
in the main a parallel course. 

So far as I can learn the Italian humanists be- 
gan to be interested in Hebrew before the Greek 
Testament became an object of attention. Appar- 
ently one of the first of them to have such an 
interest was Gianozzo Manetti who lived in the 
first half century of the Italian revival. Toward 
the end of the century others of them were led by 
curiosity to begin the study of Hebrew in order 
to master the treasures of knowledge that were 
supposed to be in the Jewish theosophic system 
called the Kabbalah. A number of scholars came 
under the influence of this delusion. For com- 
panions they had even soberminded statesmen and 
hardheaded warriors. Is it possible that this ac- 
counts for the 73 Hebrew volumes in the library 
of Frederick Duke of Urbino (1444-82) out of 
the total of 772? Even Pico de la Mirandola 
(1463-1494), that Italian marvel of erudition, 
afirmed that ‘no science yields greater proof of 
the divinity of Christ than Magic and the Kab- 
balah.”’ 

As Greek letters had been learned from Greeks 
so Hebrew was learned from Jews. ‘Through 


[43 ] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


centuries of study of their Bible with immense 
industry, sometimes ill-directed, they had accumu- 
lated a great body of material; grammatical, lexi- 
cal and exegetical. ‘They took advantage of the 
invention of printing for the publication of their 
Bible before the Christians did for their Greek 
Testament. Beginning with the publication of 
the Hebrew Psalms in 1477, they followed with 
other parts of the Old Testament and by 1484 
the whole Hebrew Bible was published four years 
before the first classic Greek author was pub- 
lished. ‘Thirty-two years later when the first 
Greek Testament was published they were print- 
ing the fourth edition of the Hebrew Bible. Dur- 
ing these thirty-two years they had several times 
published parts of the Old Testament, sometimes 
with elaborate commentaries. 

When Christians took up the study of the Greek 
New ‘Testament the help they had was a great 
mass of general knowledge of Greek learned from 
the study of the Greek classics. At the same time 
when they began the study of the Hebrew Bible 
they received a great amount of help derived from 
the protracted studies of the Jews. Was the co- 
incidence a mere accident? 


(44) 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


One name associated with the beginning of He- 
brew studies is that of John Wessel, for he was 
one of the earliest humanists to be interested in 
the subject. He died in 1489, four years after the 
death of Rudolph Agricola, whom he had induced 
to begin the study of Hebrew several years before. 

The great name for the promotion of the study 
of Hebrew by Christians is John Reuchlin. As 
already seen he had become one of the leaders of 
Greek study in Germany. About the time that 
Wessel died Reuchlin came under the influence 
of Mirandola and absorbed an enthusiasm for the 
Jewish Kabbalah. He turned, however, to the 
study of the Hebrew Scriptures and became an 
ardent supporter of their study. ‘his is his chief 
claim to the honor of succeeding generations. 
Basing his work on material gathered by the Jews 
he published in 1506 a large volume containing a 
Hebrew grammar and dictionary. Germany took 
up the study with zeal. The Hebrew Bible and 
the Greek Testament became indispensable auxili- 
aries of the Reformation. ‘They also superseded 
the Latin Vulgate as the basis of our modern 
translations of the Bible, and are today the ulti- 
mate textual standard for its meaning. 


[45 ] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


Our theme concerns the part that the litera- 
tures of Greece and Israel had in the Renaissance 
or better the revival of learning. It has been im- 
possible to estimate their share and their influence 
in the movement at all adequately except by 
bringing before our minds the more important 
historical features of this revival. 

In summing up this influence we note that one 
effect due to the Greek classics was a proper esti- 
mate of the human body. The ascetic reaction 
against the sins of the flesh had come to dominate 
Christian thinking. Especially difficult was it in 
the Middle Ages to gain a sane estimate of the 
body. Great credit is due to Vittorino for the 
methods in his school at Mantua. Greek letters 
had convinced him that the proper ideal of a 
personality is that it should be “fully rounded, 
harmoniously developed.” The sane ideal of sym- 
metrical personality taught by him became a pat- 
tern for generations. St. Paul’s affirmation that 
the body is a temple of the Holy Spirit gives scrip- 
tural sanction to this ideal. 

A second result that humanists promoted was 
the Greek passion for knowledge for its own sake. 
Indeed, Greek letters presented to the mind the 


[46] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


joy of intellectual activity as a worthy and desir- 
able part of human life. Associated with this was 
confidence in the power of the mind to gain knowl- 
edge. The Greek passion for knowledge began to 
form in the intellectual activity of the century the 
mental habits needed for the correction of the 
mental deficiencies of the time. ‘These deficiencies 
concern the conception of knowledge and its use, 
and especially the activities of the imagination. 
Knowledge is gained directly by observation of 
facts in the world of physical nature or of persons. 
It is gained indirectly through human testimony. 
This testimony may come orally or by written 
records. No person is immune from error in the 
gaining of knowledge by any of these methods. 
Five centuries ago our intellectual forbears were 
immensely more liable to error in every direction 
than our more immediate ancestors. The advance 
made was greatly indebted to the study of the 
Greek classics. ‘To these writings are due the 
initial impulse toward sound methods in seeking 
knowledge and beginning of correct habits in ex- 
amining evidence. “The Greek literature was the 
product of minds that had attained the habit of 


[47] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


seeing clearly, speaking pa and recording 
accurately. 

The defects of our intellectual forbears were 
not in lack of intellectual force or in imaginative 
power. These were at times almost excessive 
and were little disciplined at the best by the logi- 
cal training of scholasticism. The allegorical 
interpretation of a writing took precedence even 
of its historical treatment. 

In the interpretation of Scripture a fourfold 
sense was commonly afhrmed: a literal sense, a 
figurative sense, an allegorical sense and a mystical 
or spiritual sense. [hus in a single sentence the 
word Jerusalem would be held to mean literally 
a city, figuratively a faithful soul, allegorically the 
church militant, and spiritually the church tri- 
umphant. Their method of studying Scripture 
had no means for excluding these fancies or even 
puerilities. 

Moreover, what passed for Heese at that 
time was often faintly marked by a sense of fact: 
nor was the value of sober fact estimated at its 
real value. Fancy often took the place of judg- 
ment in presenting facts and prevented a genuine 


[48] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


perception of them. ‘These defects are not yet 
wholly absent from mental operations. 

In learning the life of Greece from the study of 
its literature the purpose of the humanist was too 
engrossing to tolerate childishness. These ex- - 
plorers of the new intellectual domain were finding 
in Greek literature ‘‘an ideal of life, both socially 
and intellectually by which they might profit in the 
present.’’ Or, as phrased by another, they were 
discovering “a classical world which had been for- 
gotten or concealed, one, moreover, whose civilisa- 
tion had been superior to their own in political and 
intellectual freedom, in literary and speculative 
development and social culture.”’ The humanists 
wished to learn exactly what belonged to that 
civilization. “hey needed historical fact. The 
very spirit of Greek letters called for it. 

‘This does not mean that all parts of Greek 
literature were thought to be of equal value. 
Humanists like Vittorino and Guarino of Verona, 
like Origen, Basil the Great and other Christians 
long before them, felt that there was much in 
Greek literature which was not antagonistic to 
their Christian faith. But they also saw clearly 
that not all this literature had high educational 


[49] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


value and, therefore, they did not teach the classi- 
cal writings indiscriminately. 

They saw also, clearly, that the knowledge 
offered in these writings could be gained only by 
the correct interpretation of the written records. 
Not fancies, but objective fact alone could satisfy 
the desire of these humanists. 

There was little obvious temptation to pervert 
the text by allegorizing in the interest of any 
theory. The normal desire of the humanist was 
to interpret a writing so as to know its meaning, 
to learn its attitude toward life, or the revelation 
of the life expressed in it. 

If there were two or more manuscripts of a 
writing, these were hardly ever identical at every 
point. When there was disagreement a demand 
was made upon the judgment to decide which one 
was correct. It might be that a reading was ob- 
viously wrong, even impossible. ‘This called on 
the judgment to determine why it was wrong, and 
what correction ought to be made. This meant 
the learning to reason inductively, something not 
taught in the logic then current. 

All this work promoted the development of the 
scientific habit of mind, and of the proper valua- 


[50] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


tion of facts. Thus were the Italian humanists 
led into the beginnings of true interpretation and 
criticism. It was fortunate that these beginnings 
were made while dealing with a subject in which 
there was comparatively little temptation to sub- 
jectivity and arbitrariness; where the desire was 
strong for knowledge of facts, and. where dog- 
matical prepossessions had so small a place. 
Another benefit from Greek letters was the cul- 
ture of beauty and grace in literary creation. The 
discipline which brought balance and sobriety to 
the mind in the study of historical fact also cha- 
stened the mind from its fanciful exuberance. In 
the work of the imagination of the Middle Ages 
‘the materials mastered the man; he wandered 
in a wild-wood filled with innumerable paths, fol- 
lowing now one and now another in forgetfulness 
of his plan, if he had any; that sway of reflection 
which is necessary for the perfection of art was 
unknown. In the best works of classical antiquity, 
the reverse of all this is true; reason stood by the 
side of imagination, rejecting with a frown what- 
ever did not conduce to the main design, and re- 
pressing every tendency toward the overstrained 
and unnatural.’’ Such models as these when 


[51] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


greatly admired and diligently studied, could but 
chasten and discipline the taste of European 
letters. 

‘Akin to this remark is another, that the forms 
of classical antiquity were needed to awaken and 
direct the sense of beauty. The unregulated lux- 
uriant, half-educated minds of the Middle Ages 
could in no way so soon get rid of their defects 
as by becoming familiar with the style and laws of 
composition of the ancients. Greek taste, the ex- 
quisite sense of proportion and fitness, the beauty 
and grace which breathe in language, style, metre, 
and all art although transmitted chiefly through 
the Romans, an inferior race in this respect, speak- 
ing an inferior language,—these were the source 
from which a new sense of elegance, finish, and 
propriety, new laws of composition, a new style of 
art, a higher culture of society were to emanate.”’ 
(Theodore Woolsey, in New Englander, xxiii. 
664M.) Thus the development of culture was 
accelerated by centuries. 

These results did not come immediately, nor’ 
during the Italian stage of the revival of letters. 
While the beginnings were made there and then, 


[52] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


the process of educating the imagination and taste 
was slow and long. | 

Of course the scholars who studied for the sake 
of the literary qualities learned their lesson far 
sooner than most. Those who sought knowledge 
alone were little observant of aught else. ‘The 
non-scholarly producers of literature could not be 
directly affected. These must first be affected 
through the translations of the classics into mod- 
ern languages. ‘he translations by their selection 
and treatment of materials, and by the structure 
of the writings could contribute to the education 
of the non-scholarly world. Later also came the 
influence of such writers as had absorbed the ex- 
cellencies of Greek literature by direct study of it 
and who reproduced them in their native tongue. 

Another aspect of the value of this literature 
which is the obverse of things already noticed is 
the fact that Greek letters brought quite full 
recognition of the truth that literature has in it- 
self a value for man because of the pleasure which 
it brings, because of the capacities of the soul 
which it quickens into activity, and because of the 
breadth of the culture which it promotes. 


[53] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


The scientific attitude of mind fostered by 
Greek letters was not onesided. Greek letters 
taught to exclude fancy from historical statement, 
it forbade ungrounded subjective opinion, or any 
subjective opinion where objective evidence was 
available. 

It brought also a corrective for that form of 
scientific habit which can see no facts, truths or 
realities save in physical objects perceptible by 
the senses. With various imperfections unavoid- 
able in the beginning of a great work, the Platonic 
Academy at Florence learned and taught that 
there are great truths and realities of the human 
life unreached by the physical senses. 

The moral appeal of Plato made the noblest 
appeal of which Greek literature was capable, and 
was the strongest resource it had to withstand the 
crass paganism of the later stages of Italian 
humanism. 

To recapitulate the modes in which Greek let- 
ters showed power: 

They imparted a sense of the value of culture 
as a good in itself; 

They fostered a passion for knowledge, full, 


[54] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


exact and objective, and a correct instinct how to 
arrive at it; 

They aroused a sense of beauty, of symmetry, 
of perfection in the expression of what was in the 
mind; 

They strengthened the sense of the reality out- 
side and above the phenomenal life of man, as 
Aeschylus, Plato and Demosthenes show; 

They gave emancipation from authority which 
was merely human. 

Why, then, was there such paganism in the 
later Italian humanists? 

An occasion for this relapse into paganism was 
the emancipation from merely human authority. 
The cause was lack of moral principle to take the 
place of external restraint. This paganism was 
the outcome of a century of deterioration. 

Men of the days of Petrarch had felt the an- 
tagonism between ecclesiastical authority and what 
seemed to them to be indisputable fact. This 
frame of mind rendered them open to the liberat- 
ing influence of that literature which alone ‘‘dis- 
played human nature in the plenitude of intel- 
lectual and moral freedom.”’ Greek letters threw 
open a wide gateway into a broad realm of free- 


[55] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


dom from authority, and the alluring novelty of 
this intellectual life broke the bonds of intellectual 
authority in Italy for a hundred years. 

It may be that the majority of men when enter- 
ing into a life of freedom are unable to distin- 
guish between it and license. Certainly the 
majority of the later Italian humanists, after the 
freedom of thought was gained, showed them- 
selves incapable of using it and the utterance of it 
as it ought to be used. ‘They heeded not the 
lessons that their pursuit and attainment of knowl- 
edge might have taught them. 

Humanism had become a profession of letters 
subject to royal or wealthy patrons. Elegance of 
expression was the chief virtue. The favor of 
patrons meant ease, comfort, luxury. Their dis- 
favor meant poverty and suffering. Other author- 
ity failed; why practice any self-restraint ? 

Here was the weakness of Greek culture. It 
grew out of a pagan life, and hence was incom- 
plete. The love for beauty and the passion for 
knowledge were there but these are not enough. 
The ideal of culture with beauty as the dominant 
note cannot produce a symmetrical life. Neither 
can it do this with the passion for knowledge 


[56] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


dominant. Nor yet can the two so sustain each 
other as to bring about a symmetrical personality. 
The majority of the Italian humanists adored 
beauty, in some form; those of France worshiped 
knowledge. So it was with many humanists else- 
where. Something was lacking. Culture cannot 
be an end in itself. It is doomed to failure as to 
the production of symmetrical manhood. 

Such manhood comes only when the ideal of 
goodness is joined with the other two. Further 
this ideal may stand second to nothing else, for 
it alone can give the others their highest value. 
It is said that Petrarch, the first humanist, had 
as an ideal for the guide of his life ‘“‘the double 
lights of culture and conscience.’”’ When ideals 
are cooperating as on an equality now one will 
claim the primacy and now another. If the pri- 
macy is uncertain, now here, now there, stability 
of character is lacking. In Petrarch’s double 
lights one of the elements needs to be dominant 
in deciding the character of the whole, and must 
always be conscience. ‘There is no substitute for 
the sense of duty, and there is nothing higher than 
it, except God. When humanists failed to heed 
the voice of conscience or to be ruled by duty, a 


[57] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


pagan literature could not remedy the deficiency. 
It had not the moral dynamic in it, because it came 
out of a life deficient in that dynamic. 

Not by knowledge or intention did these hu- 
manists cast up a highway for the coming of God. 
Yet in spite of their moral defects the Italian hu- 
manists made all subsequent generations their 
debtors. They “rescued from destruction the 
treasures of antiquity, and prepared the way for 
a proper understanding of, them. ‘Their method 
was crude; their knowledge was imperfect; their 
attention to rhetorical forms ludicrously exag- 
gerated. Yet they laid the foundations of classi- 
cal philology, of the science of grammar, of intelli- 
gent criticism, of clear expression. They stood at 
the opening of a new era, and their labors only 
furnished the foundation for the labors of others.”’ 
(Creighton, History of the Papacy during the 
Reformation, 11. 343.) 

‘Italy had not only led the way—she had done 
the heavy work of clearance as well. She had 
recovered the long-buried treasure of classical 
literature; she had laid the foundations of textual 
criticism; she had produced grammars, treatises 
and other aids to study. ‘The Italian leaders had 


[58] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


thus broken ground for those who came after 
them; scholars in northern countries, to the enor- 
mous saving of time and effort, were able to enter 
into their labors and adapt them to their own 
needs.” (Hudson, Story of the Rennaissance, 
53 f.) 

Thus it should be said that in spite of all the 
weaknesses of Italian humanists, during that cen- 
tury under the influence of Greek letters “‘they 
created the new atmosphere of culture, wherein 
whatever was luminous in art, literature, science, 
criticism and religion has since flourished.” 

When Melanchthon in his Inaugural at Witten- 
berg, August 29, 1518, and again after the Leip- 
sic discussion in 1519, put the Greek and Hebrew 
Scriptures in the supreme place of.external author- 
ity, and thereby made the study of Greek and He- 
brew the necessary preliminary to the scientific 
study of theology, he did more than all previous 
humanists toward correcting errors which they 
had criticized. He fairly justified the extravagant 
estimate which Erasmus had published respecting 
him. Indeed, he also corrected the fundamental 
weakness of humanism by making Greek letters a 
servant instead of a master. For the ideal of the 


[59] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


“holiness of beauty’? he substituted that of the 
“beauty of holiness.” Thus was humanism dis- 
armed of the paganism which so marred its in- 
fluence in the land of the humanists. 

In making this principle operative Melanchthon 
and Calvin, who also began his career as a human- 
ist, gave examples illustrating the highest service 
Greek culture can render; not as presenting a 
norm of literary beauty and culture, nor yet as a 
source of knowledge, but as a help in attaining 
the most adequate preparation possible for under- 
standing the word of God. 

The humanists (as Hellenists) brought to He- 
braic-minded scholars the text, dictionary and 
grammar of the New Testament and a matured 
discipline for its study. It was fortunate that 
Melanchthon and Calvin learned the methods of 
critical study wrought out in the study of the 
Greek classics and before the passion had arisen 
for gaining -notoriety by propounding some 
hitherto unthought of novelty in interpretation or 
theory. They studied while the object of critical 
study of the Greek classics was literary and un- 
warped by religious desires or preconceptions, and 
while the subject was still so novel that other 


[60] 


The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance 


novelties need not be introduced. ‘The truly scien- 
tific habit of mind in its search for truth is more 
easily formed in a discipline where the aims are 
simply intellectual and the appeal to the feelings 
the least possible. 

We may, therefore, think it a part of the provi- 
dential education of the race that the method of 
the interpretation of writings and of the scientific 
observation of literary facts were learned by men 
through the study of pagan literature. ‘Thus it 
was on neutral ground that the problem was 
solved of gaining sound knowledge from written 
sources. 

In this manner, with freedom from theological 
prejudices or controversy, an instrument was pre- 
pared and presented to Melanchthon and Calvin 
by which Protestant teachings were provided with 
their subject matter and by which they could be 
defended. 

The influence of the literatures of Greece and 
Israel combined in the revival of learning was that 
they furnished the controlling factors of the lite- 
rary, intellectual and religious development which 
_ began in that era, and for which factors no sub- 
stitutes have yet been found. 


[61] 








ek 
Ca PUY ae 


Pani OOga 
} ri 








e.. 


a 


AP 


« 


vfs is 


Fg 


sa 
ay 


Py 
es 
nt 
. 








PN721 .D39 
ge literatures of Greece and Israel in 


on Theological Seminary—Sp 


A 


1 1012 00027 8798 





